All In One Brewery...

[PistolPatch]

Yep James not too sure where that water went to. Had lid on for most of the time but there was a fair whack of condensation floating around???

I don't think mashing thin was the problem. I think it was more that the grain was very condensed in the sock and therefore was very hard to rinse. A large sock should solve the problem.

APD: Hopefully we'll get this working in the next fortnight. That way you'll need no buckets and won't have to scoop all the grain out of your kettle! :beerbang: Another advantage is that only one volume of water has to be prepared so sparge calcualtions are not required. Not that this is hard but it's just one less thing to worry about.

Will post back here once the sock size problem is solved.

 

[Trough Lolly]

JS. I so like the way you are thinking.

As far as I can see, the question you are asking is, "Can I mash 5kg grain in 30 litres of water at around 65 degrees without detriment?"

If yes, then one vessel will be fine and you have made a brilliant breakthrough. Unfortunatley, I don't know the answer but am certainly hoping it is, 'Yes!'

Am hoping some people here do have a definitive answer. Whether yeah or nay, your thinking is very good.

Cheers
PP

Interesting thread...
There's a few momilies floating around the brewing world and one of the olden goldies is no-sparge brewing...
YES, you can mash 5kg grain in 30L at 65C and get a damn fine beer. In fact the general consensus is that you end up with superior malty flavour profile when you skip the sparge step, but it's also agreed that you suffer in extraction efficiency. But that is a highly debatable and somewhat complex topic that I won't go into at this stage, simply because I don't know all the ins and outs of that debate!
Instead, I can refer you to an interesting article by Jim Hilbing on no-sparge brewing that you might want to have a look at: click here...

The late Dr. George Fix is normally credited with kicking off this concept, back in a seemingly innocent post on the US HBD.org website in 1992. For convenience, I've quoted it here...

Date: Thu, 24 Sep 92 08:14:25 CDT
From: gjfix at utamat.uta.edu (George J Fix)
Subject: Yummy Malt Flavor
I somehow missed Joseph Hall's original post concerning beers with a
very high malt profile. The following was sent to him via private e-mail,
but it bounced.
Clearly the malt types used is a matter of the utmost practical import.
However, I have found that to get a very high malt flavor the sparge
must be omitted as well. This is an expensive way to brew since the amount
of grains needed must be increased by a factor ~4/3. Nevertheless, some of
the world's great ales and lagers have been brewed this way, and I have
found it works in homebrewing as well for special beers. Clearly this is
not the way to brew our standard beers.
The following is offered as an illustration. You clearly may want to modify
things to suit your environment. The control batch is more or less my standard
procedure, and the experimental batch is the no sparge version. A three step
infusion (135F, 152F, and 162F) was used for both along with a 1 1/2 hr. boil.
Hopping is according to your preferences, but I have found for these beers more
is better than less.
CONTROL BATCH
Brew Size = 50 liters (13.3 gals.)
Grain Bill = 11.5 kg. pale malt (25.3 lbs.), 1 kg. crytal (1 kg.)
Mash Water = 32 liters (8.5 gals.)
Sparge Water = 32 liters (8.5 gals.)
Vol. at the Start of Boil = 56 liters (14.8 gals.)
Starting Gravity = 1.060 (15 deg. Plato)
EXPERIMENTAL BATCH
Brew Size = 50 liters (13.3 gals.)
Grain Bill = 16.5 kg. pale malt (33.75 lbs.), 1.25 kg. crystal (3 lbs.)
Mash Water = 44 liters (11.5 gals.)
Water Directly Added to Kettle = 20 liters (5 gals.)
Vol. at the Start of Boil = 56 liters (14.8 gals.)
Starting Gravity = 1.060 (15 deg. Plato)
Note that the mash thickness is just about the same in both batches. In the
experimental batch the extra water not used in the mash is directly added to
the kettle.
Note: If you have the extra vessles, sparge, boil, and then pasteurize the
dilute wort that normally be left in the grains in the experimental batch.
I have found it useful for yeast storage and yeast propagation.
George Fix

Cheers,
TL

 

[James Squire]

Thankyou very much for your response TL,

This makes me very happy to hear... The small downside of 20% more grain per brew is nothing compared to the positives (not space consuming, smaller setup cost, less time) for my personal situation. Especially if it makes just as good beer that way!

Cheers mate, im currently piecing together equipment to give it a proper run in the coming months...

JS

 

[AndrewQLD]

As always TL, you have come up with the goods, some nice links there.

After reading this thread my first thought was "no-sparge brewing", easy enough to do away with the HLT but you would still need a boiler, so the system can easily by reduced to 2 vessels. I am going to combine my HLT and mash tun for my next brew and see what the results are comparing the same recipe no-sparge against my normal method.
mashing in with 36 lt of water would require a large vessel and even a 50lt one would be pushing it if you are brewing a high gravity beer.
I can see some benefits to no sparge brewing, time saving being one, but that would depend on how long conversion takes.
Sorry if my post has gone off thread a little, but it might be interesting to see if a no sparge beer is acceptable Taste-wise ect before trying to design a single vessel brewery.

Cheers
Andrew

 

[James Squire]

Hey there Andrew,

Thats not moving off thread mate, its all worth discussing as it seems that everybody has different ideas of how these things can work. Make sure you let us know here how your next experimental brew goes.

I guess the point im working on tho is that if you can do it in two you can do it in one... (well, effectively two if you count a basket as another vessel!) You are going to set up using a mash tun and a boiler right? Well if you could mash in your boiler and remove the grain before boiling then you could do it in one vessel! Picture the old bucket in bucket system then you're close to what I have planned, sort of!

Boil water to temp in boiler, dump grain basket into boiler with grain inside, mash, raise basket above wort level and re-circulate wort through grain (mini sticky sparge!), remove grain basket, then boil as normal.

Thanks again TL, I think this is definately looking good enough to experiment with. Whats the worst thing that can happen.... if it doesn't work then I've still purchased myself a new boiler and only need a HLT and to modify my esky! Worth a go I reckon!

JS

 

[PistolPatch]

[Another long post but I think for those following this thread and who are thinking of having a bash at AG then detail is probably best. Will try and lay it out neatly so it's easy to read. If you are interested in James' idea, which I think is great, it's probably easier to copy this post to Word so you can read it quickly on a full screen. Long posts are sometimes very annoying to read but I can tell you, they are always very embarrassing to write!]

Trough's Post

As AndrewQld said, once again Trough, you have come up with the goods. Not sure how you retain all the info you do but it's certainly a great asset for other AHB'ers. In this case, it's also very encouraging.

Dr George Fix's post you quoted above, I fully understood. The only question I have on this is why did the good doctor add the 20lt to the kettle instead of putting it into the mash?

I think what James is trying to do (and I would like to do) is add all water required into the mash. In the Doc's example, James and I would have added the entire 64 lts to the mash rather than 44. I can't see the extra 20 litres being a problem. The doc was basically doing a double batch so if people are mashing a single brew, size of the vessel will not be a problem unless as Andrew pointed out the beer is really big.

The link was a little harder to for me to understand as I think, once again, the, 'Dilute Mash," method meant not adding the entire volume required at the beginning of the mash.

All in all though, from what I can see, there doesn't seem to be any huge disadvantage to mashing with the total mash and sparge water required, i.e. extremely thin. Is there a name for the proposed single addition method that James is proposing? There probably is but let's call it SAM for now until either someone can correct the name or James comes up with his own! Also, for the sake of discussion and to match Andrew's proposed experiment, let's assume we're going to mash 5kg in 36litres.

Single Vessel Brewing

AndrewQLD, as James said, you are certainly not off-topic and from the PM's James and I have exchanged, I know he would be as thrilled as me seeing you and Trough contribute. Helps a hell of a lot.

Firstly where James says, or I have said, 'single vessel,' we are bullsh*tting slightly but what we are saying is that all you need is a kettle - no esky (mash tun) and no HLT.

S.A.M. Using 3 Bits of Equipment

James' idea involves only 3 things - a 'strainer' (suspended in the kettle), a kettle and a pump. Post #25 above summarises this method. His idea has the advantage of the strainer mesh size not being so critical as the wort will be re-circulated until clear.

There are only 2 probs I can see with James' method. Firstly, it involves a pump (expensive) and secondly, I'm guessing it would take considerable time for the wort to run clear. (Sorry James, just thought of a third problem. By the time the wort runs clear, the brew may well be extracting tannins - I'm not too sure if I'm right on this and hopefully a more experienced brewer can set us right.)

I don't think James is too attached to buying a pump and so thankfully he is also interested to see how my variation below works out.


S.A.M. Using 2 Bits of Equipment

James' method triggered another idea which involves only a kettle and a, 'mash sock.' This is exactly the same as James' ideas except, instead of using a pump and the grain bed to clear the wort, the container that holds the grain is actually made of the 250 micron mesh as used in Ross's hopsock. This extremely fine mesh and gravity replaces the recirculating pump. Post #18 outlines this method.

Summary - 2 Upcoming Experiments

Well James, I know you've provoked a bit of a following on this thread amongst people in the same boat as you who are in the process of saving up for or collecting equipment for their first AG. Hopefully, your thread is going to be a big breakthrough for them and also for others like me who have limited space and concentration levels Looks like....

....AndrewQLD is going to be the first to test the the SAM method for you by adding 36lts of water to his esky, mashing for probably the normal amount of time and then draining the sweet liquor produced into his kettle. Andrew's experiment will answer a lot of questions and by the look of things, the answers will hopefully be fairly positive.

I've asked Ross for some help in designing a mash sock to handle 5-6kg of grain and with a little luck we'll come up with a stitched up bit of something to follow through on Andrew's test. (What happens in this design process is I send Ross a 3 page email containing about 150 ideas and he writes back one line saying, 'Pat, why don't you just do the third thing you suggested?' I then go, 'Oh yeah, right.' LOL!) Anyway, this test should answer any clarity issues and if successful, nullify the need for a pump.

Finally, I did have a few questions I would have liked to ask here but this has been way too long already.

Thanks again James,
PP

 

[AndrewQLD]

I will be brewing my Bosuns Best bitter on Sunday PP, and will be using my 50lt S/S mash tun as a combined hlt and mash tun. I will post the recipe and efficencies after the brew with comparisons to previous batches brewed using my normal 3 vessel method.

Cheers
Andrew

 

[PistolPatch]

Once again Andrew, thanks for taking such an interest in this. When James comes on line next he's going to be absolutely wrapped and will hardly be able to contain himself until Sunday.

As for me though, being far cooler, I may, if I have the time, casually check in to AHB to see how you went.

LOL. I am absolutely hanging to hear how it goes! Fingers crossed...

Pat

 

[James Squire]

Pat and Andrew,

Struggling to contain myself guys! Love the fact that this thread is building in interest. I hope that this can help some inexperienced brewers gain some priceless information and even perhaps help some convert cheaply to AG.

Good luck for the Bitter on sunday Andrew, can't wait to hear the results!

As always Pat, cheers for the support! Oh and cheerio to Ross for his help with Pat's experiments...

I finished off my Peltier Controlled Fermenting Cupboard last night in great success so the next step is to focus on this project. New stainless kettle on its way this week, I'll keep everyone informed!

Cheers and better beers,

JS

 

[wobbly]

Interesting Thread Here is my two cents worth.

Going back to the basic principal first posted by James and commented on by Minerbryg

If you use a "bucket" fully suspended in an electric urn is the water to grain ratio really 5 or 6 to 1? Maybe it is only around 3 to 3.5 to 1

Example

I have a 30lt electric urn 350mm dia which equates to approx 1lt per cm of depth.

The Urn element is on the bottom and to cover the element accounts for about 2.5 to 3 cm or 2.5 to 3 lt.

If I insert a bucket fermenter with a dia of 250mm (with a mesh screen bottom) into the urn "to clear" the elementand add 25lt of water the vols are dispersed as follows (approx)

- 3lt under the bucket covering the element
-16lt in the bucket
-6lt between the bucket and the urn walls

With 5kg of grain in the bucket isn't the ratio 16lt/5kg = 3.2 to 1?

Seeing that the mash liquor temperature is only in the mid to high 60's C why couldn't you use a basic "Bunnings" water feature pump for the recirculation pump and thereby elliminating a high cost item of a high temperature pump

Opertion could be.

With the pump running drawing off from under the "bucket" the water in the annulus between the bucket and urn walls could well be static and only serve as a thermal mass around the bucket. In an ideal world it could have an SG at the top of the annulus of 1000 gradeing to Mash SG near the bottom.

To provide a cheap screen in the bottom of the bucket drill a number (say 20+) 9mm holes in the bottom of the bucket and place a piece of fibre galss fly screen mesh in the bottom of the bucket held in place by a simple tight fitting metal ring/hoop similar to the "bucket in a bucket" systems described on other threads.

Mash as per Minerbryg schedule and then raise bucket above urn liquid level and add make up water (assume 7 lt) to the top of the mash (fly sparg?) and let drain through into the urn. You could even continue to run the pump if that helped.

An alternative could be to up the grain bill and opt for a "no sparge" method targetting a higher SG which could then be adjusted by adding top up water to the boil.

Your comments would be appreciated

Cheers

Wobbly

 

[James Squire]

G'day Wobbly,

We're obviously on similar wavelengths here mate, I described the bucket in bucket style, hole drilled, mesh covered bucket plan to PistolPatch in a PM a few days ago!

I also was thinking along the lines of using a cheaper pump, not neccessarily a water feature pump but was thinking along the lines of a washing machine/dishwasher pump. Not 100% sure but im guessing they'd have a continuous temp rating of somewhere in the high 50c to 60c. With some experiments this might prove to be a viable option...

Just to touch on your water/grain ratios. I believe (could be wrong) that if done properly the static water issue can be avoided and in doing so then the ratio's would be calculated based on the total water used. Meaning that going by your example it would be 25L water to 5Kg grain; therefore 5:1.

I will be getting my new 40L urn this week and possibly immersion heater by next weekend also, I have already a washing machine pump ready to trial. When ready to experiment I'll nick down to grab myself a 20L food grade bucket and use some of the stainless mesh I have lying around to make a nice 'basket style' bottom for it. Once I've sorted out these bits and pieces then I'll give the plan a crack! Thats if the missus gives me time out from home reno's to afford the build time.

Im not sure if this covers all of your post as im into some Boddingtons tonight and can't really remember your actual q's but regardless of that at least you have an idea of the specifics for what I have in mind.

Cheers for now,

JS

 

[AndrewQLD]

I started the brew this morning at 7.15am, My mash tun had 39 lt of water pre heated to 72c as calculated by beersmith to give me a mash temp of 66c. Grains were tipped in and sirr

 

[AndrewQLD]

I started the brew this morning at 7.15am, My mash tun had 39 lt of water ( 7L/1k) pre heated to 72c as calculated by beersmith to give me a mash temp of 66c.

Grains were tipped in and stirred for a few minutes until well dispersed and the mash temp settled at 66c without need for further adjustments

I normally mash for 60 minutes but after reading PPs post regarding the efficiency rising after the 60 minute mark I decided to set the timer to 90 min and I shall take a refrac reading at 60 min and onwards.
I will post more results as the morning progresses.

Edit: I believe I could possibly fit another 2 kilos of malt into the tun before reaching the top, so it looks like 7.5 kilos would be the limit in my 50lt vessel.
Cheers
Andrew

 

[PistolPatch]

Didn' realese we'd be lucky enough to get pics as well - looks good enough to eat. Nice score on the strike temp as well.

I don't think I let my wort cool enough the other day during my initial refractometer readings. Noticed it went up a few points when I let it cool for about a minute.

Hopefully seeing your grain is so loose, there won't be too much of a diff in the readings after 60 minutes - hope so! Can't wait to hear what you come up with.

 

[FNQ Bunyip]

Interesting shape cut out.. ? I'm sure you have a valid reason for this .

As someone looking to try AG later in the year this is a very interesting topic.. I'll be following it closely... Off to local show now but will be on my mind thats for sure..

Good luck with it ...and thanks for taking up the chalange, you to Pat Your all doing great things for us that are slow on the uptake to AG.

:beer:

 

[bigfridge]

Interesting shape cut out.. ? I'm sure you have a valid reason for this .

As someone looking to try AG later in the year this is a very interesting topic.. I'll be following it closely... Off to local show now but will be on my mind thats for sure..

Good luck with it ...and thanks for taking up the chalange, you to Pat Your all doing great things for us that are slow on the uptake to AG.

:beer:

On other mashtuns I have seen the weird shape allows teh false botton to slip in.

 

[bigfridge]

I started the brew this morning at 7.15am, My mash tun had 39 lt of water ( 7L/1k) pre heated to 72c as calculated by beersmith to give me a mash temp of 66c. ...

I believe I could possibly fit another 2 kilos of malt into the tun before reaching the top, so it looks like 7.5 kilos would be the limit in my 50lt vessel.
Cheers
Andrew

I just looked back at my records and my 50 litre tun is full to the brim with 40 litres water and 13 kg grain.

HTH
David

 

[wobbly]

James

I don't see the "static" water as an issue

I guess what I was trying to put was that because the water in the annulus could/would be static perhaps you shouldn't consider it as part of the mash ratio calculation so then your grian to water ratio inside the bucket would be lower than first thought and more towards the "traditional" mash range.

i.e. your mash would be the "thin porridge" allowing the enzimes all the "warm fuzzies" people talk about that they need/thrive on.

Cheers

Wobbly

 

[AndrewQLD]

60 minutes into the mash and a refrac reading gives me 1.030, 5 points under expected, 30 minutes later the reading was 1.033, only a loss of 2 points from my expected eff. into the boiler. To be honest that is better efficiency than I thought I would get, so obviously the extra 30 minutes mash time helped a lot.

I recirculated the wort for about 10 minutes and then pumped to the boiler, Volume was spot on 33lt and the SG read 1.033 so an efficiency of 68.6% into the boiler, normally I would get 70% but a drop of 1.4% is not worth worrying about. Starting the 90 minute boil now so all should be as normal from here on in.

This method is very simple, heat all your water, dump in the grains, stir, leave for 90 minutes, Recirculate and pump to boiler.

Tiny efficiency drop, but it's so close to being on the money it's not worth worrying about.
Temp in the mash tun stayed fairly constant with only a 1 degree drop over the 90 minutes probably due to the fact the tun was so full.
I seemed to spend less time hanging around the brewery waiting for the batch sparges to complete ect.

I didn't raise the mash temp for mash out but my burner was turned on straight away and the wort was boiling within 10 minutes of the mash tun being empty. My slight eff drop could have been caused by not raising the temp to mash out.

This method did not really save any time on the day due to the extra 30 minutes mashing.

I will let everyone know how the beer tastes in about 3 weeks when it is kegged. I will be interested to see if the maltiness or mouthfeel are effected by this method.

So to sum it all up mashing with all of your brew water did not really effect my efficiency or clarity of the wort into the boiler, it's simple and easy to do, and I think I saved electricity by not having to raise the sparge temps as I do when I batch sparge.

I will leave it up to you fellas to work out the hard part :blink: , doing it all in one vessel :lol: .

Cheers
Andrew

 

[PistolPatch]

Well, there you go James!

Brilliant summary Andrew. Looks like I'll be able to brew while I work!

One question: Did you give another stir during the mash or would this make no difference?

Once again, thanks a heap for trying this out.

:beerbang: Pat